Big Poppa Pump
- My Name Is My Name -
Bristol gets my vote. There's something very classy and rare about it! :thumbsup:
is this the BADDEST car EVER?
- Thread starter ManifestDestiny
- Start date
Namreg
Banned
the viper engine is from the dodge ram pick up truck... just like a mustang engine is also found in the F150. the interior is cheap plastic (as with all american cars), and the handling is t3h suck. for that kind of money i'd get a used 911. even older ones can look good, and used gallardos (i know, they're not "real" lambos, but close enough) or ferrari 575 are now below 100k on ebay. so the agricultural viper seems idiotic.
but to each his own i guess. google team oreca or hennessey performance for some nice vipers.
but to each his own i guess. google team oreca or hennessey performance for some nice vipers.
Legzman
what the fuck you lookin at?
The Viper isn't even close to the baddest car ever. Not even by american built standards. First off the italians have the market cornered on the bad ass cars. Lamborghini, Ferarri and Maserati. All are fuckin sick. Then there's the germans...Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Porche.
You get the idea. Compared to those...dodge isn't shit!
You get the idea. Compared to those...dodge isn't shit!
You'll have to show me some numbers on that.I don't ever recall any Porsche street car that could claim fastest car,especially in the same years that the Viper was made('92 and on).Not saying that the Viper was ever the worlds fastest car,because it has never been.
It's more like the other way around.They put Viper motors into the SRT-10 Ram.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Ram_SRT-10
But to get technical though,the first Viper motor was based on the Chrysler LA motor that was in Magnums not Rams.The one's in Vipers are Aluminum blocks instead of cast iron that the Magnums used,plus other differences the essentially make them two different motors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_LA_engine
Namreg
Banned
the current 911 turbo does 0-60 in 3.2 seconds, according to motor trend. most other magazines get around 3.4-3.6 secs.
and you're right, it's usually a ferrari that's fastest (F40>959, enzo>Carrera GT), although the VW veyron is the fastest right now.
thank you for the link. i thought they simply re-cast the block in aluminium, made it rev higher, and were done for the day. it's stilla truck engine though... 2 valves with pushrods, and low specific output.
as far as bristols go, they are among the most pathetic things ever created by mankind in all of recorded history. they build their cars on a chassis from 1947(!) because they don't have the cash to get a new one through government testing, and then claim that they do this on purpose because it makes their car physically smaller "than its competitors".
and here is review of a bristol:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article798773.ece
and you're right, it's usually a ferrari that's fastest (F40>959, enzo>Carrera GT), although the VW veyron is the fastest right now.
thank you for the link. i thought they simply re-cast the block in aluminium, made it rev higher, and were done for the day. it's stilla truck engine though... 2 valves with pushrods, and low specific output.
as far as bristols go, they are among the most pathetic things ever created by mankind in all of recorded history. they build their cars on a chassis from 1947(!) because they don't have the cash to get a new one through government testing, and then claim that they do this on purpose because it makes their car physically smaller "than its competitors".
and here is review of a bristol:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article798773.ece
Maserati?!
At least you could have mentioned the Pagani Zonda.
As far as Italian sports cars go,Maserati is a piece of shit compared to the others.Every time that I've read a review of any Maserati in what ever car magazine,they usually don't rave about them.
But you are right.The Viper really doesn't stack up to the great supercars of the world.I wouldn't even consider it to be the best American sports car at the moment.The new Corvette ZR1 is 600 hp and would more than likely knock the Viper's dick in the dirt.
Sorry for the double,but...
The current 911's numbers were achieved back in '92 by the F1(and it produced those numbers on a naturally aspirated motor,and not a turbo or supercharged one) ,and ever since then everyone has been trying to match and exceed them.
Only until the CCX came out was anything faster,only to get shattered by the Veyron.Ferrari has never been faster than any of these three.The F1,CCX and Veyron are pretty much the Holy Trinity of street supercars(I would say that the S7 would be in there as well,but I've always seen conflicting numbers on them).
Supposedly there was another car that was made a few years ago that called the Barabus TKR, that was touted as the world's fastest car,but I don't think that the numbers that they claimed were ever substantiated.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/barabus-tkr-takes-over-as-worlds-fastest-car.html
But now just after doing a little searching,this seems to be the new king of the hill
http://www.thesupercars.org/ssc-aero/2009-ssc-ultimate-aero/
The current 911's numbers were achieved back in '92 by the F1(and it produced those numbers on a naturally aspirated motor,and not a turbo or supercharged one) ,and ever since then everyone has been trying to match and exceed them.
Only until the CCX came out was anything faster,only to get shattered by the Veyron.Ferrari has never been faster than any of these three.The F1,CCX and Veyron are pretty much the Holy Trinity of street supercars(I would say that the S7 would be in there as well,but I've always seen conflicting numbers on them).
Supposedly there was another car that was made a few years ago that called the Barabus TKR, that was touted as the world's fastest car,but I don't think that the numbers that they claimed were ever substantiated.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/barabus-tkr-takes-over-as-worlds-fastest-car.html
But now just after doing a little searching,this seems to be the new king of the hill
http://www.thesupercars.org/ssc-aero/2009-ssc-ultimate-aero/
My 2005 Scion xb!!!!
I understand what you're saying,but remember when Porsche produce a street legal version of their LeMans race car called the GT1?It was twin turbo,over $1 million,and tried to dethrone the F1... and failed.
http://www.supercars.net/cars/1548.html
Yeah,ultimate aero is a pretty uninspired name for a car that's supposed to be the fastest street car on Earth.
Namreg
Banned
they didn't fail because it wasn't a production car. they were forced to make 1 car in order to homologate the GT1 as a street car (as only racers based on street cars were allowed under the rules), and then ended up building about 20 cars for wealthy customers. the top speed was purposely limited by the aerodynamics to around 197mph, and the engine was detuned to only 544hp due to emissions.
i must say i was disappointed by the carrera GT, i'd love to have one but i think it would have been better with central seating and at least 650hp... maybe next time.
i must say i was disappointed by the carrera GT, i'd love to have one but i think it would have been better with central seating and at least 650hp... maybe next time.
Spleen
Banned?
You see, "cool kids" like to use negative words to describe things that are actually good. A "bad" car, is actually a good one.
But not every word can work. Describing a girl as "ugly" will not make her want to sleep with you. It's a very delicate skill than only "cool kids" can truely understand.
But not every word can work. Describing a girl as "ugly" will not make her want to sleep with you. It's a very delicate skill than only "cool kids" can truely understand.
Legzman
what the fuck you lookin at?
I knew I missed one. Didn't realize pagani was italian. Maserati is one I thought of, thats all.
I guess my point is that Porsche has never ascended into the upper echelon of supercar status,so even though they were limited on what they were able to do with the GT1,there is nothing that really tells me from their past that they would've been able to compete with my "holy trinity" anyway.Maybe they could have,but I guess we will never know.Seems that they decided that it just wasn't economically viable for them to get into that game anyway.Can't say that I really blame them either.I see plenty of Porsches on the road.Not too many Paganis or McLarens though(as in zero that I've ever seen on the street).
Either way,this is pretty much a moot conversation considering that these supercars are only accessible to the very wealthy and very connected individuals.The best thing that the Viper has alway had going for it was even though it is an expensive car,it'snot nearly as expensive as the others and it's really not that hard to get one if you have the money.
Even if you had the money that it cost to get an Enzo,good luck trying to get your hands on one.Same goes for the CCX,F1,and the Zonda.There just aren't that many of them even in existence,and those who have one just aren't that willing to give them up.
From The Autocar road test (this is for the base model though) , it doesn't match up with Clarkson's ideas but then he was testing an older model Bristol.What I've put in bold type doesn't point to an antiquated system
"The original promise had been an all-aluminium chassis, but the reality was a massively strong box-section structure in steel, with aluminium honeycomb flooring and a couple of mighty roll hoops. This and the suspension – coil-sprung double wishbones with anti-roll bars front and rear – gave the whole thing a believable, professional air. When this structure appeared, clad in a graceful aerodynamic skin of hand-beaten aluminium (wings, roof, bonnet) and carbonfibre composite (door, tailgate) it drew every eye. And again, when it emerged that the coefficient drag factor was a low, low 0.28, and at 1540kg the car’s kerbweight was 400 to 500kg below its heaviest competitor.
Bristol, once an aeroplane manufacturer, has always seen things differently to other fast-car manufacturers. It wants nothing to do with downforce, which brings implicit drag, but designs for stability and streamlining and an absence of lift, so the car’s performance above 120mph puts others in the shade.The car is a safe handler, too, benign when cornering hard and long enough in the wheelbase to resist unscheduled tail-out stuff. There’s a stability control to make sure it doesn’t go too far, if you’re brave enough. I wasn’t. You stroke this car along, feeling the thrust and gather in mighty units of distance with every gearchange.Bottom line? I was sincerely impressed by the Bristol Fighter. It was remarkably capable and competent for a model of which less than a dozen have been built. Other makers build five times that number, just for the practice. This old aeroplane company really can build a modern car, and (evidently) one with enough individuality and performance appeal to attract people with car collections, who just want something entirely different.
Similar threads
